Politician Archive
Thread: Why do so many of you want PRIVATE cities for just small numbers of people? That's dumb!
zaren_vendu wrote:
The only people in the game that can make a player city is a guild, period. No one player can make a city hall, place it and get enough people to join to make the 24 hour deadline, its not possible. A guild is the only player organization that can generate the tallent and resources to make the cities work.
Rofl, are you kidding me? Anyone can get organized, being ina guild isn't a requirement.
I have never been in a guild on Shadowfire. Our city started Wednesday night by placing 2 houses. Thursday we placed the city hall and started moving people in. Today we have nearly 50 peopleeither inside the city or right outside the limits- including around 30 master crafters from every profession under the sun. IMO, the city, by being neutral and completely independant from any guilds will have much more growth potential than a PA basedcity. Why would people want to come move in with a PA when they are the outsider and they have to live under the rule of someone with an alternative agenda? To me, PA based cities go against the very nature of what cities are supposed to be.
I do agree though that everyone should have a fair shot at a city though - everyone has to start small, and everyone should have a fair shot at starting out. When they lift the caps and up the citizen requirements - the competition for citizens will become pretty fierce. The well planned and most appealing cities will thrive, while the others die off.
Sorry, a pa city...heck a pa itself is like a nation. What you describe is barter town. Now maybe some people like to run around doing the tina turner thunderdome thing, but some of us like things more civilized. Our definition, but should be our right. Welcome to crazy word, where nations cant defend themselves, people have no right to an individule identity, to exist, or defend themselves...please gather X groups numbers +1 to destroy all they have built.
Guilds (nations) have a right to exist. Free wheeling merchant town should to. The two dont have to be mutually exclusive.
KeliG wrote:
ok I am truly sorry, but nearly everyone in this thread is very simple minded..
you are all just missing the point. And I said nearly not everyone. Some of you made very good points to either side and still fall in the simpleminded role for me..
...
IAM Keli... I AM a politician... and I AM a mayor /bow3
Um, nice story Keli, and it was an interesting read. But you didn't really support one side or another or say anything about the topic we were discussing. See, we were mostly talking about whether or not smaller cities have every bit as much right to exist and growas the cities of groups whoalready havea lot of residents.
The original poster seemed to think that small towns are taking upcity slots and spacedeserved by those that had larger amounts of residents. Some of us think that any group that was lucky enough to get a city hall down in time deserved it. My point was that many of those small private towns want to grow large but decided, logically I think, to wait and learn about the Player City system first before being too committed to one city style or location.
There also seems to be a misconception that because a lot of small towns currently have zoning turned on, that they don't want any new residents, free elections, or to interact with other groups. I hope some of the posts here have shown this is not always (or often) the case. I know in our case we only have zoning activated because we want to inform new citizens of the overall city plan so everything stays organized.
It's great that your community developed gradually, something many of us are starting work on now. But what does that have to do with our thread topic? I'm sorry, I guess I'm too "simple minded" to understand what side of the disussion your post was taking, or even what point you were trying to make.
oh ye simpleminded one... jk..
the moral of my story is simply... that everythingstarts from nothing...
the little guys have as much a right to start their own city as the big guys..
but also that the little guys should be more diplomatic if they wish to keep their city...
everybody here was making strong arguments for either side... but missing the picture as a whole.. in effect not realizing that there is another side to the story and hence being simpleminded in my opinion
not to play the devil's advocate but have you ever heard of a tyrant? 
who said all our cities have to be a democracy? im saying that in response to the statement you made about politics being the aquisition of power through non violent means.
im not a small city guy i expand daily and invite people in... i just like being a dictator and not allowing anyone else of power in
Dudes, you are all missing the point of my original post:
I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BENEFIT 10 PEOPLE FORMING A CITY GET?
If you have 10 friends and want a city but haven't got one, then you're not actually losing anything.
How does having a city with 10 people enhance your enjoyment? The only different between 10 houses IN a city and 10 houses WITHOUT a city is that the ones IN a city are opening themselves up to be taken over by Master Politicians who understand that process properly.
There is NO benefit to having a city if you are not aiming to have it run by a Master Politician - trust me. If you just want 10 people in a circle, your safest bet is to stick with a Guild Hall for a number of reasons:
1. It is much cheaper.
2. People cannot take over your Guild, but they CAN take over your city.
3. You will never get any decent Politician XP with only 10 people in your city, so you will never be able to plant an proper city structures.
I'm just trying to help you guys out here and save you a lot of time and money! 
Yours,
Like in countries there r big cities and small villages, some small villages grow others dont or eventually die, one thing is for sure, ppl have the right to live where they want .
In SWG when cap is lifted the same will happen and im glad for that, some small player city could grow others dont but at least they enjoy making one and be the mayor of city eventually they move to big city but one thing is for sure, ppl also have the right to live where they want cos they PAY for the game.
If you want a Town. Place a Town Hall.
COmpletely different things.
A Guild is a Players Club. A Town is a Community.
Both are independent of each other. at times they overlap.
Havoclord wrote:
I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BENEFIT 10 PEOPLE FORMING A CITY GET?
Many of the people starting a 10 person city want the same thing as everyone else wants. Growth, increasing amounts of city services, and something (anything)interesting for them (especially the non-combatants, who have so little content)to work on. You can't really judge the ambition of thosecities by the size they are now. Some of them won't work as hard to get these things though, and their cities will fail.
To learn city benefits for those who want to remain small cities, you could just try looking at allowable city strucutres and a politician skill chart.
Let's say a group wants to be no larger than rank 2. Theymay just want to level their politician enough to get mission terminals, a bank, some outdoor decorations, and maybe some skill trainers. In addition to this, theygetan easy automatic way to tax their members. Theycan earn map registration to help the visibility of their crafters, and have a militia to protect their area. That's an enormous benefit to many small groups. If those smaller groups feel that those things are worth theirinvestment in city maintainance, that's their business. And after playing with that amount of services for awhile, they'll probably decide they want more and work harder to grow.
The only reason anyone cares about those folks wanting to stay small are the planet caps, which are NOT their fault. It's a pity that the caps had to set everyone against each other this badly, but citizens of smaller towns want to use the game mechanics for their enjoyment just like everyone else and have every right to do so. Just because your idea of worthwhile benefits and theirs don't match up, doesn't mean they're wrong.
donnah42 wrote:
Let's say a group wants to be no larger than rank 2. Theymay just want to level their politician enough to get mission terminals, a bank, some outdoor decorations, and maybe some skill trainers. In addition to this, theygetan easy automatic way to tax their members. Theycan earn map registration to help the visibility of their crafters, and have a militia to protect their area. That's an enormous benefit to many small groups. If those smaller groups feel that those things are worth theirinvestment in city maintainance, that's their business. And after playing with that amount of services for awhile, they'll probably decide they want more and work harder to grow.
OK thanks - a sensibile answer at last! I still do not know why these people would not save the cost of running a city by joining an existing city or sticking with a Guild, but at least I can see your logic
The danger is, we will end up with 100 cities on each planetary map and the whole thing will become pointless... at which point the Devs will either:
a. Increase the cost of planetary map registration to the point little groups cannot afford it;
b. Increase the minimum population size to the point small groups do not have enough people to earn registration;
Alternatively,
c. Master Politicians will train their protegés and encourage them to take over nearby small cities so that they get control of them.
d. Small cities based around Guilds will suddenly find that a LARGE number of other guilds set them as group enemies so that they can grief them.
I have to say - this is absolutely brilliant. I think that this latest function adds an exciting dimension to the game that will really separate the men from the boys!
Thanks,
ok.. I'm going to stab at this.. (Iread most.. but it was getting boring hehe)
WHAT is the BENEFIT of having a 10 PLAYERS city?
1. Area of Control, orginally if you have a PA hall and some houses around it.. you have a little space in the middle for good looks.. now.. (this happen to us all the time) a GOOOOOOOOOD mineral shows up.. guess what? you are going to see ALL kinds of harvestors blocking your path.. (small, med larg,, whatever they can fit it) if you happen to be the highest concentration... with player city and zoning rules.. those areas are only PLACABLE by players.
2. mission terminals (population 15). You can currently use houses as cantinas (which we do) and another house as a medical facilitiy (actually we use the same one) for our PA to rest up and go back out in a fight.. this is good.
I know it may not be fair.. but our PA had lots of people, but all of us are working (And some member are from different country) so we couldn't place a city (me being the only architect) on tatooine. so on release day, I manage to place one on datooine at 11pm central time.. which mean if anyone who really wanted a city could have beat me easily.. I guess the need for city vs location preference is not high enough... granted there was a cap.. sure we were upset have to move EVERYthing.. (top that off I build another tat PA hall thinking it would work on dath... silly me)
